Posted on 01/27/2015 5:57:55 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
* Almost 90% of Obamacare enrollees in California qualified for financial help based on their income last year.
* Average monthly Obamacare subsidy in California was $436 per household last year.
* A big challenge for California's health insurance exchange is signing up more middle-income people.
Californians received $3.2 billion in Obamacare premium subsidies during the rollout of the federal health law last year.
Those individuals and families paid $1.1 billion in premiums themselves, meaning for every dollar they spent the federal government paid an additional $3 to their health insurer.
Health policy experts said the fact that subsidies covered such a large share of Californians' premiums suggests that most people who signed up in the first year of the Affordable Care Act were lower income.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
subsidies and Skittles for all!
What is Spanish for “Gibsmedat?”
Its like alimony. The screwin’ your gettin; for the screwin’.......
“dame ese”
Obamacare is a financial disaster. Its been estimated that there is approximately $50,000 of government spending for each policy that has been written. The vast majority of those funds are to cover the beurocracy and pay institutions for whatever care they render.
We could have just bought every uninsured person in this country a policy for 1/10 of what Obamacare has cost us.
It’ll morph into some type of single-payer. The Genie is out of the bottle.
If 90% are getting subsidies, that means that 10% are PAYING all those subsidies.
This, among other things this administration is pushing (like ‘free’ tuition) is just blatant redistribution. The problem is that over time this will have the effect of ‘all boats float lower’ - with the exception of the elite of course, just like in the USSR.
The only reason to signup with an exchange is to seek subsidies. My guess is 90% took the subsidies up front. The other 10% weren't sure if they were going to be eligible, so they will reconcile on their taxes if they are. But in order to be eligible for subsidies, they have to have an exchange policy.
I know. In Texas, 87% of those who signed up via the exchange were eligible for a subsidy!
Either way, that is a SHIT LOAD of people riding and lounging in the wagon, and a whole lot less pulling the wagon!
Ditto that. A 3 to 1 ratio isn’t all that surprising though. A couple around 60 years old that keeps their income just below 400% FPL can get that kind of subsidy..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.